This commentary will be very non-specific except to relate the backdrop for the story.
As it begins, the U.S. is in the middle of a storm of terror attacks that have continued for weeks amid hundreds of deaths. This is something of a departure for the show. Usually the threat is only beginning in the first hour of the season. This background is presented in the very first scene and provides the framework not only for this season’s threat, but also for a type of social commentary.
In an early scene, presidential advisers are seen arguing over security measures, including racial profiling, that may deprive some (especially Arabs) of their rights. One of the early subplots involves a man, apparently guilty of nothing, but under what the FBI considers reasonable suspicion, is taken into custody under ‘enemy combatant’ designation. We are led to believe this is not exactly unusual. He is one of a group we see being dealt with in such a manner.
This is a very direct reach into current headlines. We cannot help but think of the Padilla case. So far as we know at this time, it is very rare for an American to be labeled an ‘enemy combatant’ and thus deprived of his/her Constitutional rights. 24 is asserting that if the situation gets bad, it will get a lot less rare. When I saw the man get slapped with the ‘enemy combatant’ tag, my first reaction was, “That would never happen.” (I have this reaction quite a bit when watching 24.) But then I thought, would it?
We’re obviously intended to consider this question - what the ability to label someone an ‘enemy combatant’ could lead to. An adviser in an early scene specifically mentions the ‘slippery slope’ argument. It’s not too subtle, but then, 24 rarely is. It also seems more like a political commentary than is usual for 24 because it implicitly criticizes the Bush administration – or it simply raises questions about it. I suppose it depends on your point of view. The arguments raised by advisers are balanced and reasonable. It’s what happens to the character who is arrested that seems heavy-handed.
Article comments
1 - Jammer
Perfect take on 24, and what I have been telling people all week. Let the show ask tough questions of all of us on both sides of the political spectrum. Its off to a great start in that respect after only 4 hours. This is what Keifer promised in interviews before the season began, and they are delivering.
2 - Victor Lana
I like the way you tackle the episodes of Season 6. You're looking at overall themes, the subtext, and the impact they have on the viewer (as well as reflecting the real world).
I think you've captured the great power and beauty of 24. It's even something Republicans and Democrats can agree on in one way: it's subject matter is compelling and makes us ask the BIG questions.
That is a rare TV show indeed.